Counselman v. Hitchcock
Counselman v. Hitchcock, 142 U.S. 547 (1892), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that not incriminating an individual for testimony was not the same as not requiring them to testify at all. The court reasoned that as long as evidence arising from the compelled testimony could incriminate the individual in any way, the Fifth Amendment guarantee against self-incrimination was not satisfied. The court then passed the broader "transactional immunity" statute.[1][2]
| Counselman v. Hitchcock | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued December 9–10, 1891 Decided January 11, 1892 | |
| Full case name | Counselman v. Hitchcock |
| Citations | 142 U.S. 547 (more) 12 S. Ct. 195; 35 L. Ed. 1110; 1892 U.S. LEXIS 1990; 3 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 2529 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinion | |
| Majority | Blatchford, joined by unanimous |
References
- William Cohen; John Kaplan (1981). Constitutional law: civil liberty and individual rights. Foundation Press.
- Counselman v. Hitchcock, 142 U.S. 547 (1892).
External links
- Text of Counselman v. Hitchcock, 142 U.S. 547 (1892) is available from: CourtListener Findlaw Google Scholar Justia Library of Congress
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.